What prevents the hacker from cloning the whole web-page of, say, facebook.com login and phish users for credentials this way? This is not a hyphotetical thing, Kali Linux even bundles a utility program for that.
Compared to that, one icon, that is the same as that of the company, is not that threatening.
Not only that, but if you consider a sign in form that wouldn't have a logo, it would be way easier to trick user into putting their credentials in, because the user wouldn't be able to differentiate them. Also OAuth is always branded AFAIK.
Users may also notice discrepancies in the logo, if it was cloned poorly. Though I can't think of a way someone couldn't forge a logo given all the possibilities. Adobe Illustrator can trace images into svg and there's plenty of companies' svg logos just in the google search.
I have to say though, the responder to the first comment did a bad job at conveying what exactly refterm is... Apparently people falsely think that refterm is a terminal emulator and use it interchangeably with terminal and terminal renderer, while it isn't.
If you were to open refterm once, you'd see a text that explicitly states "DO NOT USE IT AS A TERMNIAL EMULATOR", or something like that (can't open it now to copy exact).
The "font some random HN commenter happened to use" is some f****** proportional Calibri. I want to see someone use it in any terminal emulator. Refterm defaults to Cascadia Code, but, fair enough, it doesn't have fallback yet.
Its' description says also: "Reference monospace terminal renderer". "monospace" is there for a reason.
It's worth mentioning though, that Windows Terminal also defaults to Cascadia Code and Cascadia Code was installed automatically on my machine, so it's de-facto the new monospace standard font on Windows starting from 10.
How is it not applicable when the thing at question is rendering text and rendering is the core of game development? This argument is stupid. Do you have to be a slowpoke to develop commercial apps?
Refterm is a not a full-featured terminal in terms of configurability, but it has all the features needed for rendering. Configuration like: choosing fonts, choosing colors, tabs, whatever, it's misc. features, which are unrelated to rendering. The case here is about rendering and it's exactly what is shite in every terminal emulator.
I don't understand why everyone is arguing about it anyway. Refterm provides a fix, Windows Terminal should simply implement it. Is this dignity or what? Are you not engineers? Should you not prioritise software quality above everything else?
EDIT: Remove argument about ease of development, because refterm is easy.
This bugs me every time. "Wow, this software works so good, but we are not gonna make our software like that, no, we'll stick to our shite implementation."
Some people here mention feature plateaus and completeness of the app. Obvious question is, what should the employer then do? The software is complete, from now on there's only maintenance, which is relatively less work compared to building from scratch, so as a consequence I guess developers should be paid less then? Or like you said, fired?
Obviously the manpower could be just moved to the next project, but what if we look at the worst case scenario? What comes next?
Are there at all such mechanisms that could allow for, say, a team of engineers that maintains a bunch of projects in different companies. If such a team would take a maintenance of a few complete programs, the count of them would make up the difference in pay, e.g. a few mainted apps for a lower pay equal pay for building one app from scratch.
I wonder though, whether b2b software also suffers from this, because such software isn't really made for public recognition and etc. in the first place.
